Why you can't trust measurements

[Windows X]

2 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

Seems to me you have much in common with most of us here.

 

It's only from some people that use the word objective and measurements to divide what most common practices we all audiophiles do but you don't do the way I approve to be good enough.

[Samuel T Cogley]

2 minutes ago, Windows X said:

 

So what is objective determination that inform what you purchase? Can you define it?

 

I didn't really touch on my selection criteria in this thread.

 

The best response I can think of is that I treat my audio gear like any other electronic equipment.  I don't have an affinity for it.  It's just like a toaster or microwave.

 

I like to listen to music and I don't listen to Audiophile Music.  If I have to listen to "special" music to "appreciate" my audio system, something's wrong.

 

I think an extremely high quality DAC can be acquired for under $5k and my ears tell me a $30k DAC would be a waste of money.  Maybe if I listened to Audiophile Music I would have a different opinion?

[Iving]

10 minutes ago, Windows X said:

I see. I guess using calculation on your head is not objective until I use calculator then. Thanks for telling. Yeah modding a few hundred of audio gears with tons of checking with oscilloscope doesn't seem to be objective enough to say why I should read all those.

 

What you quoted of mine covered quite a lot - and had nothing to do with calculators.

 

I thought we were talking about our buying approaches - and whether yours - as a rare "high end" objectivist - is better/more reliable than the common-or-garden chiffon objectivist.

[Iving]

10 minutes ago, Windows X said:

It's only from some people that use the word objective and measurements to divide what most common practices we all audiophiles do but you don't do the way I approve to be good enough.

 

The case is yours to yet be made - that your high end approach is truly exclusive (and actually objective).

[Windows X]

Before this escalates too far and people forget the point of this thread. I'm speaking about content in this video as shown in original below.

 

 

He clearly said "Some companies such as Schiit audio have even begun releasing products with completely different design philosophies because at the moment particularly in the more budget market segment measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does."

 

Yes "measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does.". Try to stay in this topic, please. Maybe you guys can explain why measurements sell a lot more than subjective feedback in budget market segment. Or maybe you guys can disprove his claim that subjective feedback actually does sell more in budget market segment.

 

I think deep down you guys know the truth already and try to avoid confronting bitter reality of whatever you have in mind. How about you guys discuss whether measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does or not instead?

[Iving]

3 minutes ago, Windows X said:

Before this escalates too far and people forget the point of this thread. I'm speaking about content in this video as shown in original below.

 

 

He clearly said "Some companies such as Schiit audio have even begun releasing products with completely different design philosophies because at the moment particularly in the more budget market segment measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does."

 

Yes "measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does.". Try to stay in this topic, please. Maybe you guys can explain why measurements sell a lot more than subjective feedback in budget market segment. Or maybe you guys can disprove his claim that subjective feedback actually does sell more in budget market segment.

 

I think deep down you guys know the truth already and try to avoid confronting bitter reality of whatever you have in mind. How about you guys discuss whether measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does or not instead?

 

I think Golden and Amir have had problems in the past. I tried to help them stay cool. There's only so much that one man can do.

[Windows X]

14 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

I think Golden and Amir have had problems in the past. I tried to help them stay cool. There's only so much that one man can do.

Their issues has nothing to do with "measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does". Please don't try to bring personal matters from 3rd-parties into this. I'm asking you guys to discuss about this topic. You guys seem to have some issues with me elaborating this point on so how about clarifying about this matter on the right point?

 

If you don't agree that measurements sell a lot more than subjective feedback on budget market segment, elaborate your point why. I'm listening.

[Samuel T Cogley]

11 minutes ago, Windows X said:

I'm asking you guys to discuss about this topic. You guys seem to have some issues with me elaborating this point on so how about clarifying about this matter on the right point?

 

I'm still trying to understand what you meant by this:

 

Quote

people who can buy only budget gears need to convince themselves they buy best bang of the buck product having measurements superior to more expensive product.

 

You seem to want to stay on topic, yet you contributed this to the thread.  Why?

[GoldenOne]

17 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

I think Golden and Amir have had problems in the past. I tried to help them stay cool. There's only so much that one man can do.

The video is not about amir.

Nor do disagreements between Amir and myself have anything to do with why certain market segments sales are heavily influenced by objective measurements

[Iving]

12 minutes ago, Windows X said:

Their issues has nothing to do with "measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does". Please don't try to bring personal matters from 3rd-parties into this. I'm asking you guys to discuss about this topic. You guys seem to have some issues with me elaborating this point on so how about clarifying about this matter on the right point?

 

If you don't agree that measurements sell a lot more than subjective feedback on budget market segment, elaborate your point why. I'm listening.

 

OK - well - since Golden took you seriously by upvoting you:
1. Golden's reported assertion that "at the moment particularly in the more budget market segment measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does" is not supported, here anyway, by evidence. It may or may not be true. I don't know. It has never applied to me when I bought "budget" equipment. I would go by reviews maybe. And my own ears. Rarely if ever measurements.
2. Anyway this issue is not why I joined the conversation. I joined it to explore whether you were as alone as you felt you were - as an objectivist at the high end - and then it seemed that your approach may not be so objective after all. I think we are done on that one.

[Iving]

Just now, GoldenOne said:

The video is not about amir.

Nor do disagreements between Amir and myself have anything to do with why certain market segments sales are heavily influenced by objective measurements

 

I know this full well.

 

You may recall I supported your position throughout that difficult "gauntlet" episode. See my record on ASR.

 

I meant to suggest - lightheartedly only - that you would be aware of the play of budget equipment measuring "well" on ASR - and that Schiit were part of that equation.

 

I favour a Mani phono over a Cambridge one. Nothing to do with measurements.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, Iving said:

 

I know this full well.

 

You may recall I supported your position throughout that difficult "gauntlet" episode. See my record on ASR.

 

I meant to suggest - lightheartedly only - that you would be aware of the play of budget equipment measuring "well" on ASR - and that Schiit were part of that equation.

 

I favour a Mani phono over a Cambridge one. Nothing to do with measurements.

 

...and this surely had something to do with Schiit now offering three Yggys, one specifically made to measure better.

 

Disclaimer: I own an OG Yggy.

[Windows X]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

I'm still trying to understand what you meant by this:

 

 

You seem to want to stay on topic, yet you contributed this to the thread.  Why?

 

Am I the only one who ever brag to my friends like I spent X amount of money in this system and got sound like Y amount system? You can't call yourself a true objectivist without doing that even once in your journey. :D

 

1 minute ago, Iving said:

 

OK - well - since Golden took you seriously by upvoting you:
1. Golden's reported assertion that "at the moment particularly in the more budget market segment measurements sell a lot more products than subjective feedback does" is not supported, here anyway, by evidence. It may or may not be true. I don't know. It has never applied to me when I bought "budget" equipment. I would go by reviews maybe. And my own ears. Rarely if ever measurements.
2. Anyway this issue is not why I joined the conversation. I joined it to explore whether you were as alone as you felt you were - as an objectivist at the high end - and then it seemed that your approach may not be so objective after all. I think we are done on that one.

 

My post here was always about his context. I don't know why you guys keep derailing topics even to the point that you drag content creators' personal matters into this.

 

To summarize about your post, it's about you don't know whether his claim is true or not as you don't do it like that. And you don't think I'm an objectivist enough.

 

Anyway, I'm not calling myself objectivist like you guys are doing because making purchase decision in audiophile is always subjective to me and many others who buy highend stuff. I can't just read Amir's reviews and measurements about R7HE being terrible and May Audio having best measurements among $5k DAC and go buy May DAC without listening.

 

I ended up buying R7HE after hearing a few $4-5k DACs I'm interested and check their design's philosophies and internal building. Will R7HE sound better than so called better measurements DAC? I don't know but I don't like cold and analytical DAC because I want perfectly neutral sound and R7HE with latest firmware seems to do fine after burn in. Must admit it sounds really terrible during break in period. I wonder if they measure fully burned in unit with long enough operating hours to keep DAC stable.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, Windows X said:

 

Am I the only one who ever brag to my friends like I spent X amount of money in this system and got sound like Y amount system? You can't call yourself a true objectivist without doing that even once in your journey. :D

 

With respect, this is non sequitur.  You seemed to say that those who can't afford "good equipment" (which is a subjective characterization) are more concerned with measurements than sound.  But more than that, you ascribed psychological attributes to those lowly peasants:

 

Quote

people who can buy only budget gears need to convince themselves they buy best bang of the buck product having measurements superior to more expensive product.

 

I'm very curious to know if you really believe that, and what you think that does to your "objectivist credibility".

 

 

[Windows X]

7 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

With respect, this is non sequitur.  You seemed to say that those who can't afford "good equipment" (which is a subjective characterization) are more concerned with measurements than sound.  But more than that, you ascribed psychological attributes to those lowly peasants:

 

 

I'm very curious to know if you really believe that, and what you think that does to your "objectivist credibility".

 

 

 

It's called budget segment for a reason. If I offend any budget customer with my wording, I apologize then. It's not my intention to belittle budget spenders as I used to be one too. Most people buy budget because they couldn't afford better ones and want to get the most of cash they have on hand. I mean no malice and try to get the truth of this matter in straight forward manner.

 

And yes, I do believe what you asked because I heard a few people including my past self being like that and told me like that. Like I need to get dual DAC chip model for this price or get balanced output for example. Some even confessed their regrets on believing in ASR. Are we clear now?

[botrytis]

1 hour ago, Windows X said:

OK I look into your gears and I can see objectively better choice but can't be cheaper for most parts but I guess I can find some.

 

1. AMD A10? That's very noise processor and I also have laptop with that processor too. I'd say Intel Celeron/Atom/i3 will sound cleaner due to less EMI and noise from processor itself. Yeah you can buy cheaper computer that sounds better. Please don't use AMD processor for audiophile PC. I have a few clients asking to transfer license and came back after testing new AMD and back to Intel.

 

2. TEAC UD-501 is good value but UD-503 is objectively better, way better for little price increment. Maybe if you can find some good deals or good used price, yeah it can sound better than new UD-501 bought at full price. And Esoteric which is also from Teac but highend division will sound way way better at very high price.

 

3. If you use Rotel RC-1590 as preamplfier only, get preamp only product at the same price should sound better because at least it can save ~$100-200 of production cost on DAC circuit and greatly reduce noise from digital circuit to interfere analogue circuit board. I guess finding good new preamp is hard for this price range. I'd rather get integrated than buying preamp below $5k personally. Maybe you can some good used preamp instead?

 

4. I'd take any second hand good Threshold amplifier over Benchmark AHB2 amplifier, period. But for new amps to sound better, maybe Anthem would be OK? I'm not sure if that will fit your subjective tests but yeah it can be objectively better upgrade.

 

5. And I'd say any speakers around the same price as Revel can be objectively better also. New Audio Physic model doesn't sound bad. Maybe PMC or Fischer which can perform quite well for less expensive upgrade.

 

Well, I did try as you asked. I guess the only audio equipment I can find better at cheaper for real would be your amplifier and your speakers. As I told you before, it's hard to find good upgrade at cheaper price. Otherwise we all will ended up being budget audiophiles as things keep being better but cheaper. ;)

That has changed and the A10 is not a noisy APU. I bought the Rotel to use in our front room system but my wife wants a simpler system. 

 

Everyone has different ears and what you think is better, I may not. I have gone through plenty of speakers and, to me, the Revels beat the pants off, in my subjective opinion, others like PMC. Audio Physics is not sold in the area, I live in, so I deal with what I can get and afford. Not crazy of the Audio Physics I have heard, same with PMC.

 

I WILL NOT BUY ANY DAC THAT SUPPORTS mQ-Anon so the 503 is out. I like my 501.

 

That is the point of this hobby, everyone has different likes and dislikes.

[Windows X]

15 minutes ago, botrytis said:

That has changed and the A10 is not a noisy APU. I bought the Rotel to use in our front room system but my wife wants a simpler system. 

 

Everyone has different ears and what you think is better, I may not. I have gone through plenty of speakers and, to me, the Revels beat the pants off, in my subjective opinion, others like PMC. Audio Physics is not sold in the area, I live in, so I deal with what I can get and afford. Not crazy of the Audio Physics I have heard, same with PMC.

 

I WILL NOT BUY ANY DAC THAT SUPPORTS mQ-Anon so the 503 is out. I like my 501.

 

That is the point of this hobby, everyone has different likes and dislikes.

 

A10 is noisy. I have it and compared to Atom/Celeron myself. I'm also AMD fan but for audiophile purposes, please don't use it.

 

And who asks about subjective opinions here? No one. We're talking about objective selection for better and cheaper right? Revel tried to get good FR at the expense of coherency and others. PMC makes good transmission line and excels above Revel in different aspects.

 

As for MQ-Anon, it's just an optional decoding filter and it won't affect your DAC at all if you don't use MQA source. Also, UD-503 doesn't have MQA. It's NT-505 model. But if you hate MQA to the bones, you should ban all products from company supporting MQA and buy others that don't support MQA.

 

Now can you see some underlying pattern here? Products around same price will have something better or something worse in measurements. I can claim PMC is better speakers than Revel because it has better bass response and coherent sound. They you will disagree with your subjective opinion and claim it has better frequency response from graph which is closer to ideals. Sounds like objective? No. This is about using objective data to backup subjective opinion.

 

Measurements don't seem to really tell us what is better they come with different ups and downs and only reviewers can lead our noses to pick what we seem to agree with in ASR? Nah I'm gonna pass that as GoldenOne stated in his video. I love reading specifications and measurements data but they're all advertising when companies start using measurements as tools to advertise their products.

 

And no matter how hard you look and how into this objectively, at the end of the day, you can't win your wife objectively and need to settle down with WAF. So audiophiles shouldn't take this objectivist quest too serious and prioritize more on subjective aspects like WAF for example.

[botrytis]

7

50 minutes ago, Windows X said:

 

A10 is noisy. I have it and compared to Atom/Celeron myself. I'm also AMD fan but for audiophile purposes, please don't use it.

 

And who asks about subjective opinions here? No one. We're talking about objective selection for better and cheaper right? Revel tried to get good FR at the expense of coherency and others. PMC makes good transmission line and excels above Revel in different aspects.

 

As for MQ-Anon, it's just an optional decoding filter and it won't affect your DAC at all if you don't use MQA source. Also, UD-503 doesn't have MQA. It's NT-505 model. But if you hate MQA to the bones, you should ban all products from company supporting MQA and buy others that don't support MQA.

 

Now can you see some underlying pattern here? Products around same price will have something better or something worse in measurements. I can claim PMC is better speakers than Revel because it has better bass response and coherent sound. They you will disagree with your subjective opinion and claim it has better frequency response from graph which is closer to ideals. Sounds like objective? No. This is about using objective data to backup subjective opinion.

 

Measurements don't seem to really tell us what is better they come with different ups and downs and only reviewers can lead our noses to pick what we seem to agree with in ASR? Nah I'm gonna pass that as GoldenOne stated in his video. I love reading specifications and measurements data but they're all advertising when companies start using measurements as tools to advertise their products.

 

And no matter how hard you look and how into this objectively, at the end of the day, you can't win your wife objectively and need to settle down with WAF. So audiophiles shouldn't take this objectivist quest too serious and prioritize more on subjective aspects like WAF for example.

 

I don't want to pay extra for something I won't use, like mQa. I refuse.

 

You don't know my wife, so don't ass-u-me you know what she will do. 

 

I will agree to disagree with you.

 

[Windows X]

7 minutes ago, botrytis said:

7

 

I don't want to pay extra for something I won't use, like mQa. I refuse.

 

You don't know my wife, so don't ass-u-me you know what she will do. 

 

I will agree to disagree with you.

 

 

I already told you UD503 doesn't have MQA. It's straight sonic upgrade with new DAC chip and design improvements making better DAC from feedback received in UD501. UD503 made it pretty big at that time. Changing from UD501 to UD503 will bring big smile to UD501 users.

 

And yes I don't know your wife and you don't seem to know a joke that went over your head when someone bringing up their wife into audiophile discussion.

[PeterG]

7 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Just trying to better understand the concept of "they're objectvists because they can't afford good kit like the rest of us"  To me, it seems like a permutation of "your system isn't resolving enough".

 

Haha--I do not like the elitist tone you refer to, but I have to confess, I do think that certain systems are not resolving enough to hear certain differences.  I have two systems--one is NAD and B&W CM-1 (about $2000 between them), the other is McIntosh and Wilson (about $25,000 between them).  My Bluesound Node 2i streamer is fine on the first system, not worth listening to on the second.  The first system is not resolving enough to tell the difference.

 

I don't really like the classist references in either direction.  There are plenty of audiophile choices between $2,000 and $200,000.  I think all of us should be able to appreciate good systems at all price levels for what they are, not dissing them for what they are not.

[firedog]

On 5/18/2022 at 10:55 PM, Iving said:

 

I know this full well.

 

You may recall I supported your position throughout that difficult "gauntlet" episode. See my record on ASR.

 

I meant to suggest - lightheartedly only - that you would be aware of the play of budget equipment measuring "well" on ASR - and that Schiit were part of that equation.

 

I favour a Mani phono over a Cambridge one. Nothing to do with measurements.

I have no data to back this up, but: I think Amir's measurements of devices under $1000 and under $500 is pretty influential. My impression is that there's a serious segment of people who only want to spend a few hundred on an amp or DAC and since it's often impossible to audition units anyway, they decide to buy units that measure exceptionally well, as their first criterion.

 

It also seems like some manufacturers are responding to this, by making units that have great measurements and by publishing those measurements. Schiit and some of the better known Chinese brands come to mind. This wasn't a "thing" a few years ago.

 

I also bought a Schiit Modi 3E for this reason. Measured well(not by Amir) , had the features I wanted, and was cheap. I'm very happy with it. I wasn't going to go to the trouble of auditioning multiple items for a $125 outlay. I'm sure many others have a similar POV. It btw, didn't embarass itself when I connected it to my expensive system.

 

The recent extremely positive reviews of the Topping DAC (Absolute Sound, subjective only) and and Pre (Stereophile, subjective plus measurements) in which there was agreement that the two under $1000 pieces were as good SQ wise (and for the pre, measurement wise) as pretty much anything on the market in their segment is telling: Even the mainstream publications are feeling the pressure from the market to review such relatively inexpensive devices that measure as state of the art. Once upon a time, neither of those publications would review such products, as they don't have dealer networks and are only available online.

[jhwalker]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

I have no data to back this up, but: I think Amir's measurements of devices under $1000 and under $500 is pretty influential. My impression is that there's a serious segment of people who only want to spend a few hundred on an amp or DAC and since it's often impossible to audition units anyway, they decide to buy units that measure exceptionally well, as their first criterion.

 

It also seems like some manufacturers are responding to this, by making units that have great measurements and by publishing those measurements. Schiit and some of the better known Chinese brands come to mind. This wasn't a "thing" a few years ago.

 

I also bought a Schiit Modi 3E for this reason. Measured well(not by Amir) , had the features I wanted, and was cheap. I'm very happy with it. I wasn't going to go to the trouble of auditioning multiple items for a $125 outlay. I'm sure many others have a similar POV. It btw, didn't embarass itself when I connected it to my expensive system.

 

The recent extremely positive reviews of the Topping DAC (Absolute Sound, subjective only) and and Pre (Stereophile, subjective plus measurements) in which there was agreement that the two under $1000 pieces were as good SQ wise (and for the pre, measurement wise) as pretty much anything on the market in their segment is telling: Even the mainstream publications are feeling the pressure from the market to review such relatively inexpensive devices that measure as state of the art. Once upon a time, neither of those publications would review such products, as they don't have dealer networks and are only available online.

I'm in that market segment; i.e., I am not averse to spending a couple thousand dollars for great audio, but I'm never going to spend the equivalent of a car (or even a house!) on audio equipment.  Given that, I want to get the best-performing equipment I can, and measurements showing truly state-of-the-art performance from a device on the low end of the cost scale is a big win for me.

 

All of my recent purchases have been driven by analysis of measurements and the associated objective narratives, and I've been thrilled with each of them.

[Allan F]

A very interesting view regarding measurements is to be found in Jason Victor Serinus’ review of the Meitner MA3 Integrated D/A Processor in the June, 2022, edition of Stereophile magazine. The following is an excerpt of the reply of Ed Meitner, head of EMM Labs and Meitner Audio, to Serinus’ question about how he felt about measurements.

 

“There is a reason for measurement up to the point that you reach a certain level of what I call “hygiene”. Beyond that you need to perform a voicing that produces 10 octaves of sound. It will always come down to the sound you hear. The measurement is the "hygiene" and the listening is the final performance...

 

I think some people think that a microphone hears the same way as our ears. So we have these room correction devices that fool you into believing that they create the perfect listening environment because the microphone tells you so. The same thing happens when you look at your distortion analyzer or whatever makes you think you are okay. You're far from okay.

 

There are sonic differences that cannot be measured.  I won't say that they never will be able to be measured, but as far as I know, there's no current measurement that will guarantee sound. I can give you an example. When solid state amplifiers came on the scene, people hated the sound because they used maximum power distortion measurements [to gauge success]. But all the problems were at zero-crossing distortion, which was a measurement that wasn't really included. As the level was going down, the distortion was going up relative to it. So, it was only after listening that the measurement was finally included. (bold emphasis added)

 

There will always be a new measurement that will be discovered. For example, the effect of jitter was initially ignored”.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[fas42]

2 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

I think some people think that a microphone hears the same way as our ears. So we have these room correction devices that fool you into believing that they create the perfect listening environment because the microphone tells you so. The same thing happens when you look at your distortion analyzer or whatever makes you think you are okay. You're far from okay.

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

2 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

There are sonic differences that cannot be measured.  I won't say that they never will be able to be measured, but as far as I know, there's no current measurement that will guarantee sound. I can give you an example. When solid state amplifiers came on the scene, people hated the sound because they used maximum power distortion measurements [to gauge success]. But all the problems were at zero-crossing distortion, which was a measurement that wasn't really included. As the level was going down, the distortion was going up relative to it. So, it was only after listening that the measurement was finally included. (bold emphasis added)

 

There will always be a new measurement that will be discovered. For example, the effect of jitter was initially ignored”.

 

 

Completely agree. That is, "there's no current measurement that will guarantee (competent SQ)". It's trivially easy to sabotage the subjective SQ by making a minor adjustment, which undoes the effectiveness of an optimisation - and I'm certain no normal metric would pick what just happened.

[Archimago]

5 hours ago, Allan F said:

A very interesting view regarding measurements is to be found in Jason Victor Serinus’ review of the Meitner MA3 Integrated D/A Processor in the June, 2022, edition of Stereophile magazine. The following is an excerpt of the reply of Ed Meitner, head of EMM Labs and Meitner Audio, to Serinus’ question about how he felt about measurements.

 

“There is a reason for measurement up to the point that you reach a certain level of what I call “hygiene”. Beyond that you need to perform a voicing that produces 10 octaves of sound. It will always come down to the sound you hear. The measurement is the "hygiene" and the listening is the final performance...

I think some people think that a microphone hears the same way as our ears. So we have these room correction devices that fool you into believing that they create the perfect listening environment because the microphone tells you so. The same thing happens when you look at your distortion analyzer or whatever makes you think you are okay. You're far from okay.

 

I always find it interesting that audiophile reviewers will drag up heroes like Ed Meitner and ask these questions, get what might or might not be profound answers, but never seem to go the next step and ask. "What do you think is the threshold for good-enough 'hygiene'?"

 

5 hours ago, Allan F said:

There are sonic differences that cannot be measured.  I won't say that they never will be able to be measured, but as far as I know, there's no current measurement that will guarantee sound. I can give you an example. When solid state amplifiers came on the scene, people hated the sound because they used maximum power distortion measurements [to gauge success]. But all the problems were at zero-crossing distortion, which was a measurement that wasn't really included. As the level was going down, the distortion was going up relative to it. So, it was only after listening that the measurement was finally included. (bold emphasis added)

 

There will always be a new measurement that will be discovered. For example, the effect of jitter was initially ignored”.  

 

Again, what does this mean "sonic differences that cannot be measured"? Since we're talking about a DAC, other than reproducing the intended digital data as analogue electrical waveforms, what does he think is still out there to be "discovered"?

 

Jitter has been discussed since the first decade of the release of CDs! Even if it was "ignored", that was just for a few years while there were other more pressing issues to deal with (like achieving a full 16-bit resolution). Likewise, solid state amp issues such as cross-over distortion of old A/B designs or "slew induced distortions" (like TIM) have been discussed since the 1970's.

 

Funny that in the 2020's we're still dragging out examples from 30+ years ago! Serinus' follow-up question should be IMO:

"So Ed, can you give me an example of what newly discovered measurement was found in the last decade?"